> Caveat: If you buy a TV don't expect it to be a computer monitor. Most TV designs are just that: TV sets. They are made to do one thing reasonably well: Take

> Caveat: If you buy a TV don't expect it to be a computer monitor. Most TV designs are just that: TV sets. They are made to do one thing reasonably well: Take a crappy satellite/cable/whatever signal and give you a reasonable image back. ... > In general terms "monitor mode", if you will, should be a mode that bypasses as much of the internal processing as possible ... > As I said before, they are designed to be TVs, not monitors. I think this is 100% the problem. TVs these days essentially are big monitors, and they should be designed as such. I believe that if a TV is taking content from a digital source (ie, HDMI, DVI, DisplayPort etc.), it should perform the bare minimum image processing possible. Things like scaling and gamma correction are necessary of course, but other operations like sharpening filters just destroy images and are unnecessary for digital inputs, and things like motion interpolation (ie. MotionFlow) are ridiculous (seriously, the only thing it improves is text like rolling credits, but it introduces serious motion artefacts to actual video and does strange things to noise in images, making the image look what I can only describe as 'slushy')... This is just my opinion from being both an engineer but also having done a lot of film-making and photography work. It just appals me to see the default settings on these TVs degrading the images so much, and it takes a lot of searching through menus to set it to something sensible, which the vast majority of the population won't do...